> From: Woody [mailto:woody.tmw@...]

...

> From: "Doug Chamberlin" <DChamberlin@...>
> >
> > I think it was done this way because the SQL
> parser/lexer/interpreter
> > really sucks. Always has. it can handle the proper syntax
> OK but handles
> > variations in really awful ways. Sometimes ignores stuff it
> should not,
> > sometimes spouts non-useful error messages.
>
> I wouldn't go that far...

Actually, from all accounts I've read from the developers, Doug comments
about the parser are right on point.

I don't agree that the current implementation is an 'abomination',
though.


Sean